'like father like son'? ? and 'like mother like daughter'? or Is it the other way, 'like father like daughter' and 'like mother like son'? or is it nonsense, it is definetely the best of both worlds , that we inherit both sides of our dad and mum characters looks and personalities?
I have heard 'like father, like son' and 'like mother, like daughter', but never the other way around. (father/daughter or mother/son). Not sure if I would call it nonsense, though. Maybe it's just me, but I always thought the son end up like the father and the daughter ending up like the mother. No idea why. It could simply because a long time ago, the world was different than it is now. The father went out to work, and the mother stayed home to take care of the kids. In a world like that, it makes sense that the son grows up to be like his father and goes out to get a job to support his family, while the daughter stays home raising her own family. It's not that relevant today, though.
I think there is some truth to it. Of course, there are things about our parental counter-parts that we choose to diverge from (abusive behavior, alcoholism, for examples), and if we admire our parents, we certainly try to emulate those things we appreciate. But I do think personalities 'transfer', even if we don't recognize it ourselves. I don't know how many times I've done something, said something, and had people say "You're just like your mother!" - and I suddenly realize they're absolutely right. I see characteristics of my father very strongly in my brother - and it's all unconscious behavior to him. He's very surprised when I point it out.
This is only occasionally true, really. There are few ways to accurately predict how a person turns out personality wise and look wise, with things like plastic surgery, I guess that changes things up as well.
Then what about the "Damn, I've turned into my mother/father"? No matter how much we try to be different, are we really individuals like we think we are?
that is a very good point about plastic surgery out goes the saying. from what science is getting up to these you may well designing a look and a character which is rather daunting to think of it.
I am not so sure about any of those sayings but I am pretty , and by following maths logic that is if two engage in making one(child) then logically speaking the child has to have equal measures of both mother and father characteristics looks and personality. This is how I see through the lense of Maths and Logic.
Well, genetically it would depend on which genes were dominate rather than getting 'equal measures'. I didn't really consider physical attributes, I guess. Depending on the angle and expression, I either look like my mother or my father, although there are 'tell-tale' features from each.
No offense, but what does math and logic have to do with reality? I think life is far more complicated than that. I don't think a child gets half the father and half the mother (so to say) when it's born, and that's it. Biologically, yes, maybe you are right. But I think a person is shaped through his or her entire life, and they will always be drawn towards either the father or mother. The whole "become your father/mother" isn't relevant until you get children of your own, and you (hopefully) don't do that until you are an adult. As for who you turn into, I don't think it makes sense if a girl turns into her father, or a son turns into his mother. Not without surgery, at least. But I do think it's common that a person turns into his or her parents. When you were a kid, your parents always told you what to do and what not to do. When you are an adult, you tell your own children the same thing - just like your parents told you.
WriterDude I think I was trying to say it is not fair on both parents to say that a son is like his dad and a daughter is like her mother. Justone for a minute imagine that a couple has only boys or girls. To say one parent oh your son is just like his dad will make the mother feel bad because she might not have a daughter and would feel left out and vice versa. where does that leave either of the mum and dad? One has to be careful to assume that because someone out there made in an assumption then we all have to follow. Expressions are just that. If and when I can't find answers to expressions that have been made but happen to not fit my equation of things then I subsequentlly rely on logics and Maths because that is the only science that is to the point and a fair. It is just another way of redressing the balance.
Of course, if we were 100% identical to one of our parents, we would be a clone of him or her. We will always have some of the father and some of our mother in us, and they again are a combination of their mother and their father and so on. But I think we have more of one of the other parent in us. Some are more like the father, others are more like the mother. Do you have brothers and sisters? If you were 50% of each parent, wouldn't your brother and sisters look and act just like you?
Every living thing that is produced by sexual reproduction is precisely 50% of each parent, every time. The 50% each contributes is different for each individual offspring ( excepting identical twins) which is why there is such diversity within a brood. A quick google search will more than likely offer up several hundred thousand sites offering a detailed explanation. There is no room for opinion here, it's a well understood principle.
@WriterDude I am sure my sibblings are equally similar in both my mum and dad, but not in everything because the rest of us has to have something of them too. It is not one sided situation is split right down the middle of course. It is a mix of both.
This is what I meant by dominant genes. We each get 50% of our genes from each parent, but not a 50/50 split of their traits.
That's right, of course. But it'is several steps ahead of what a lot are arguing about here. The basic lesson for this is "Mendel's peas" for anyone who actually want to know how it works.
I agree that we are 50% of each when we are born. But after we are born, are we still 50% of each parent? Or is it more complicated than that? I think we are shaped by one part of one parent, one part of the other parent and one part everything around us. These parts are not necessarily 33% for each person. If a person only has one parent, how can he/she be shaped of the other parent? If a person has a violent father, he/she can easily end up violent too, even if the mother is friendly and nice. (or the other way around, with the mother violent, of course.) Besides, you say the 50% each parent is contributing is different. Is some parts more important than others? Yes, most likely. So in other words, the 50% doesn't count equally for each, so it's never really a 'true' 50% from each as one parent is more important than the other.
you receive precisely 50% of your genetic material from each parent. The dominance of an individual allele in the genome does not mean that you have more of one parent's genetic material. it merely means that if there is a characteristic controlled by that allele (eye colour, for instance) then you will have the dominant parent's eye colour. your genetic makeup remain the same for your entire life so you are precisely 50% of each for the duration. on the average, your parents will contribute 25% of their material to each of their grandchildren, but that is ony an average. So your grandchildren will be about 1/4 of you, (though it is theoretically possible for them to be 0% or 50%, both of which are extremely improbable. Think of a few billion throws of the dice and having them come up boxcars each and every time for either extreme) The only way for a person to have one parent is through cloning. Some forms of life reproduce asexually of course (including at least one higher vertebrate!) producing clones of themselves, but the rest, it works just like this. Look it up. Or ignore the facts and move to Oklahoma.
Yes, we get 50% genetic material from each parent, but that does not mean we'll be 50% of each. We will be more like one parent than the other simply because one parent's genetic material will be more dominant than the other. For example, if you take 50% blue paint and 50% red paint and mix them, you will get purple paint, right? But if the blue paint is darker than the red paint, you will get a dark purple. If the red is darker than the blue, the purple will be a different color than if the blue was darker. Even so, you still use 50% of each every time. See what I mean?
Yes, i know what you mean. i have a pretty good grasp of the subject. you may display the characteristics of one parent more than another (I have a child who is damn near a clone) but the fact is that the recessive group is not neccessarily a group that bows to the other due to an inferiority. Each gene's mission is to ensure it's legacy. If a gene is submissive it may stand a better chance of surviving through the eons if it adopts a submissive role. They also serve, those who only stand and wait.
True, but the question was if we are like our father or mother, right? So in that case, yes, we definitely are. Being 50% identical to one parent and 50% identical to the other is not possible. Genetically, it might be on a very deep level. But it would be so deep it doesn't matter. I have heard all my life that I remind them of a relative, and all in all I look and act like at least three or four people. But not one person have said I look like two different people. It's always just one.
on a very deep level? you are nothing but a vehicle for your DNA. Period full stop, whole enchilada. All you are or will ever be is a device to ensure that the DNA, which is what made your body, your brain what it is and ensures through extended memes that you do all that is necessary to survive. It's the same for every living thing on this planet. You are your DNA, nothing more, nothing less. Since you got half from your father and half from your mother, you can be nothing else but a 50/50 mix of their genes. Precisely, not sort of. What you look like is one of the least pertinent things about you. Your genetic makeup has had 3.5 billion years of practice at pushing on to the next generation. both sets. neither one got their by bowing over to the other set. There are lots of books on this subject if you really want to understand how it works.
First of all... sad how little people know about human biology! Maybe it just hurts my heart because that is my major. Anyway. Biology really doesn't have much to do with this discussion, does it? The "like father, like son" and the variants of it aren't meant to be applied on a genetic basis. Or, rather, I've never heard it used in that way. I've always heard it used to explain specific personality quirks or mannerisms. Like if a father is a runner, his son is more likely to pick up running in his childhood too. It may or may not have anything to do with their genetics, but the father's influence rubbed off on his son. If a mother is a picture-perfect housewife, her daughter is probably more likely to be feminine than a tomboy as well. I never heard the father-daughter, mother-son as a phrase, but I suppose it applies as well. I do believe it's more about gender, though, as sons tend to look to their fathers as role models and daughters to their mothers. Mostly, though, I don't think much thought should be put into the phrase. Some mothers and daughters are very much alike. My mother and I couldn't be more different to the point that it sometimes feels abrasive. And that's just how it is... A phrase that seems so applicable in some situations, and yet we forget all about it when it doesn't apply, making it pretty much nonsense in my opinion.
Yes, as I said, we are 50/50 our parents on a deep level, or the DNA level. But we are far more than maths and DNA. We don't pop out of our mothers fully evolved. We evolve over time as we live. Even a 80 year old guy still evolve. The DNA-stuff is just the starting point. Who we are is far more than that.
